Can a Libertarian Spoil Bush in 2004?

by Kevin Rollins

The Libertarian Party typically does poorly in presidential elections. In 2000, Harry Browne finished with less than 1 percent, only 384,431 votes nationwide. But, the Libertarian candidate could make a difference in the 2004 outcome even while finishing in the single digits, suggests Steve Dasbach, campaign manager for Gary Nolan. They are contemplating doing to George W. Bush what Ralph Nader did to Al Gore in 2000.

“Gary Nolan’s appeal to small government conservatives and small “L” libertarians is simple: if you vote for George W. Bush again and he wins, spending and deficits will continue to rise, which will ultimately lead to higher taxes,” said Dasbach. “If advocates for small government will support Gary Nolan, especially in swing states like Florida, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Iowa, Oregon, and the battleground states in the Midwest, that could cost Bush the election”

Dasbach and Nolan feel that there are two positive results from a Libertarian candidate spoiling Bush’s campaign. One, they would put a Democratic president with a Republican congress, ensuring gridlock and partisanship. Removing Bush’s ability to get conservative Republicans to vote for spending increases, would effectively slow the growth of government. Two, a high-profile, effective, spoiler strategy would bring attention to the Libertarian candidate and to the party’s issues.

Going After The Conservative Base

To bring about this defeat they would concentrate their efforts on conservative voters in swing states like Florida. Nolan, suggests Dasbach, would be a better choice for fiscal conservatives.

“Election after election, many small government conservatives and small “L” libertarians have voted for Republicans based on promises that if they could ever gain control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency at the same time, they would eliminate programs and cut government spending.”

“However, three years of Republican President George W. Bush and Republican control of both houses in Congress has given us some of the largest increases in discretionary spending in history, 2-3 times what we experienced when Democratic President Bill Clinton and Republicans in Congress were fighting with each other, along with half-trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see,” said Dasbach.

Bush’s spending has done much to rile fiscal conservatives. Recently, groups such as the Heritage Foundation, Citizen’s for a Sound Economy, and the National Taxpayer’s Union have banded together in opposition to the administration’s spending spree.

The Washington Times quoted Paul Beckner, president of Citizen’s for a Sound Economy warning Bush and Republican leadership, “If the president doesn’t take a stand on this, there’s a real chance the Republicans’ voter base will not be enthusiastic about turning out in November, no matter who the Democrats nominate.”

Chuck Muth, a libertarian Republican, thinks that the Nolan ploy might work in this election. “Because of President Bush’s big-government ‘compassionate’ conservatism - which includes the Patriot Act, prescription drugs and illegal alien amnesty - it wouldn’t surprise me if Nolan does better in 2004 than Browne did in 2000 against Bush. But don’t blame the LP for this one; blame the GOP,” said Muth.

Libertarians have been blamed in recent years for spoiling Republican candidates, most notably in Washington state in 2000, where Libertarian Jeff Jared is said to have brought down incumbent Republican Senator Slade Gorton. Democrat Maria Cantwell took the seat when Jared got more than the difference between the two major party candidates.

In 2001, National Review’s John Miller and Ramesh Ponnuru attributed several
Republican defeats to the presence of Libertarian candidates. They said about the matter, “In this age of Senate power sharing and a razor-thin GOP House majority, Republicans can’t ignore the Libertarians. If they do, it may cost them dearly.”

Richard Winger, editor of Ballot Access News, a publication that studies third parties and third party candidates, isn’t so sure that the Libertarian Party draws more Republican than Democrat votes.

“It is a useful fiction that Libertarians take votes from Republicans,” Winger said. “Libertarians get more votes in liberal counties.” He pointed to Georgia where Libertarian talk show host Neale Boortz is popular. “Libertarians do better in north Georgia around Atlanta than they do in south Georgia which is rural.”

Winger also noted that in 2000, when Californians voted in the presidential primary, 2/10ths of 1 percent of Republicans voted for Libertarian Harry Browne and 3/10ths of 1 percent of Democrats choose Browne. Statistically insignificant? But, it demonstrates the possibility that Libertarians are not actually as guilty for Republican losses as Libertarian strategists might hope.

Can Gary Nolan Get His Message Out?

Bush’s ability to retain his own base is one question, the other question is whether Gary Nolan or another Libertarian candidate will have the campaign fortitude to even make it onto the political radar screen. If the Libertarian candidate can raise money and garner support similar to Nader in 2000, he will at least have a chance at making their sales pitch. Nader raised nearly $5 million, he has a national network of contacts with his Public Interest Research Group organizations, and he already had national name recognition from his many exploits in public policy.

Gary Nolan has been referred to as “Harrier, Browner” by some in the Libertarian Party. His background as a talk radio host and his conservative tone remind them of Harry Browne. Some party insiders complain that Nolan also seems to find discomfort with person to person campaigning, just as Browne did. He is also, physically, harrier and browner than Harry Browne and the other 2004 candidates.

Nolan is well spoken and his Lebanese background could help him with Arab Americans voters, especially in a time when Arab Americans are exposed to increased attention from the federal government. He was invited to speak at the Arab American Institute’s conference in Dearborn, Michigan alongside Senators John Kerry and John Edwards and the other Democratic candidates.

LP News quoted campaign manager Steve Dasbach as saying, “It’s an indication that some interest groups are beginning to recognize that neither the Democrats nor Republicans are truly serving their interests, and they’re willing to consider Libertarian Gary Nolan as a serious alternative for president.”

Other contenders for the nomination

Michael Badnarik has until recently, been the only other major contender to seek the party’s nomination. Badnarik is a Texas computer programmer who previously lost a race for state house. This doesn’t seem like the background for a future president of the United States, but Badnarik’s campaign has received the endorsement of science fiction author L. Neil Smith and the support from those in the party that Smith often represents. Badnarik’s campaign has been operated on a shoe-string budget, but he has managed to charm libertarian activists with his personable one-on-one style.

Badnarik’s slogan is “Lighting the fires of Liberty, one heart at a time.” In addition, to spending time talking to party activists, he also recruits attendees for an 8-hour long course on the Constitution that he teaches at campaign stops. People reportedly do pay him a fee for the class and they do stay through the length of it, which is a testament to his ability to persuade.

Aaron Russo, who entered the race in December, has the most presidential resume of the three candidates, but disagreements with party insiders could hamper his run. He produced major motion pictures such as “The Rose” and “Trading Places.” He claims six Academy Award nominations for his work. On his website he has quotes from the likes of Bette Midler and Jack Nicholson attesting to his leadership qualities.

Russo ran for Nevada governor in the Republican primary in 1998, getting 26%
of the vote. He also considered a run as a Libertarian for the governorship in 2002, but bladder cancer caused him to withdraw that April.

During the time he considered the race, the Libertarian Party tried to hook him up with a proven campaign manager, but couldn’t find someone that met Russo’s approval. Apparently, disagreements with the party led Russo to consider an independent run.

Ron Crickenberger, the party’s political director at the time, told LP News of the problems in the Russo campaign.

“We put Aaron together with campaign consultant Jerry Russell, who has 150 wins under his belt, and with Doug Friedline, who was Jesse Ventura’s campaign manager,” he said. “We also lined him up with an experienced Libertarian campaign manager. We even put him in touch with [former Clinton consultant] Dick Morris. But Aaron just did not feel that he ‘clicked’ with any of them.”

At this time, these three candidates cannot claim national name recognition nor a national organization that is already behind them. Harry Browne did raise $1.5 million, but there is no way to currently tell how well these candidates will fare in comparison.

None of the three candidates has taken in huge sums of campaign cash. In their year end reports for 2003, Nolan had raised only $45,000, Badnarik $25,000, and Russo $15,000. Of course, Russo’s campaign had hardly begun when the report was filed so he may quickly outpace the other two candidates.

However, Dasbach thinks Nolan may be able to bootstrap up to a much bigger campaign if he wins the nomination.

“If Gary’s campaign begins to take off, anything is possible. With enough support from Americans who have had it with big government, Gary could make it into the debates with Bush and Kerry. And if that happens, who knows? Gary might get the opportunity to demonstrate that small, limited government really is possible,” suggested Dasbach.

Other third party spoilers?

Finally, the Libertarian candidate’s impact on Bush’s campaign will be effected by the presence or absence of a strong third party candidate who appeals to the Democratic core voters like Ralph Nader. As of this writing, Nader has not announced whether he will run in 2004.

Just as conservatives fear Libertarian candidates as spoilers, the Democrats have reason to worry about a Nader return in 2004.

Business Week’s Paul Magnusson wrote in January, “Democrats worry that liberal defections will hurt their chances of defeating a well-heeled incumbent. Nader would compete with Democrats for money, youthful volunteers, and Internet eyeballs. Also, attempts by the Democratic nominee to shore up the Nader-friendly left flank could backfire with centrist voters.”

In such a case, the Libertarian candidate would have to be even stronger to spoil Bush.

Another possibility, suggested by Richard Winger, is that Roy Moore, the Alabama judge who was removed last year for refusing to remove a monument of the Ten Commandments might have greater appeal to Bush’s Christian base than Nolan or another Libertarian candidate.

On February 2nd, WorldNetDaily told of Moore’s ability to attract Christian conservatives:

...Moore was a featured speaker at the Christian Coalition’s “Family and Freedom” rally in Atlanta. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported he was “treated like a rock star, signing autographs and getting thunderous standing ovations.”

Roy Moore has not confirmed what his political plans are. Conceivably, a Moore candidacy taking votes from religious conservatives and a Libertarian candidacy taking votes from economic conservatives could be a double whammy on Bush’s reelection efforts.

Conclusions?

The prospect of punishing Bush for his budgetary indiscretions and his other assaults on individual liberty is at least fun for libertarians to think about. And it isn’t impossible to envision a spoiler strategy actually bringing down the president. So, we’ll have to wait and see if the Libertarian candidates are able to build strong campaigns, get the attention of Bush voters, and be able to convince them to vote for someone other than the “lesser of two evils.”

Kevin Rollins is Publisher of The Free Liberal.